The old VLS is dead.

[GARNabby]

Moderator,

Please ban me/delete my acct.

In the words of Trump, in his tv-show, "That was an easy one."

Thank you.

[Spike!]

Do it yourself. Go to your profile and under preferences take the action to delete your account.

Goodbye.

[Steve]

Done. You're right - it was an easy one.

[I have cookies]

he is the only one that uses the "an" even when the next word is starting with "w"

eg   "an wheel"

Jump on spelling and letters is so poor as you would not dear argue and bring it to the tabel - as you have no clue about all does false positives that souronds you an others ...
Sure I am stupid as your understanding is below me and your poor knowledge and comments about the game just show us your true colours ...

Cheers

[Noble Savage]

I have cookies=stupid lucky strike.

he is the only one that uses the "an" even when the next word is starting with "w"

eg   "an wheel"

How genius of you to notice! Too bad you lack the intelligence to realize what a ludicrous liar Spike truly is.

The only thing "stupid" here is your pointless posts.

[gizmotron]

How genius of you to notice! Too bad you lack the intelligence to realize what a ludicrous liar Spike truly is.

The only thing "stupid" here is your pointless posts.

Those who reject what Spike freely shares are afraid he might be right. They attempt to attack his intelligence. They never bother to see if there is anything to it. They are often suspected of being nothing more than lazy beggars. They just want proof that an acquired skill actually works before they will attempt to make an effort themselves. What they don't know is that they are supposed to reject it. They are supposed to figure it out long after the chance to use it has passed. So all we get from them is their insistent whining. They won't figure out why they are supposed to reject it. Now let's see how intelligent they are.

[sherminator]

That was my point about the leaders and the followers.
It is probably too late for the followers even now.
Creating the opportunity for YOURSELF is what it's all about.
I was a newbie in the 80's without a clue.
I was a follower in the 90's and every opportunity had a closed sign on it by the time I got there.
I worked hard in the 00's teaching MYSELF and learned some harsh lessons.
It makes me laugh when I see the brown noses. As if that is going to really help.
In gambling, you paddle your own canoe. I f you can't appreciate the first lesson, then it is going to be a fair old trek.

[Noble Savage]

They never bother to see if there is anything to it.

Oh I bothered, probably more than anyone here did.

I am not a math academic (I only know what I need to know, and what I do know I taught myself). I like out-of-the-box thinking and I did investigate possibilities for "reading randomness". I even looked into some chaos theory and tested more approaches than I cared to count. Trends, dominances, pattern-mining, ecarts, correction, law of the third, law of averages, binomial distribution, moving averages, stochastic oscillators, subjective non-rule-based guessing, staking-plans (which I investigated for a while as well), you name it.

No matter how simple, sophisticated, out of the box, experience-based, etc. my bet selection process was, the result was ALWAYS the same eventually (well, except for those times when I fell in the "unconscious curve-fitting" trap for a while). Coincidence?

I did not "jump" to any conclusions, bro. Time is precious, and I invested more time and effort into this "reading random" rubbish more than I like to admit, thanks to people like Spike and yourself.

Now go ahead and carry on your claims of doing the impossible, predicting the unpredictable. All I can say is: I know better now.

[gizmotron]

Oh I bothered, probably more than anyone here did.

I am not a math academic (I only know what I need to know, and what I do know I taught myself). I like out-of-the-box thinking and I did investigate possibilities for "reading randomness". I even looked into some chaos theory and tested more approaches than I cared to count. Trends, dominances, pattern-mining, ecarts, correction, law of the third, law of averages, binomial distribution, moving averages, stochastic oscillators, subjective non-rule-based guessing, staking-plans (which I investigated for a while as well), you name it.

No matter how simple, sophisticated, out of the box, experience-based, etc. my bet selection process was, the result was ALWAYS the same eventually (well, except for those times when I fell in the "unconscious curve-fitting" trap for a while). Coincidence?

I did not "jump" to any conclusions, bro. Time is precious, and I invested more time and effort into this "reading random" rubbish more than I like to admit, thanks to people like Spike and yourself.

Now go a head and carry on your claims of doing the impossible, predicting the unpredictable. All I can say is: I know better now.

Absolutely wonderful. It's so rare when someone comes forward honestly.

See what I mean Spike. We can almost tell them and they won't see it.

So please just go one more step if you would. Can you describe the fundamentals of reading randomness. Please make it clear what to read. I noticed that you made no reference to current states, situational awareness, or effectiveness.

[Spike!]

and I invested more time and effort into this "reading random" rubbish more than I like to admit>>>

Um, it has to be longer than 2 hours. Try 6 months and get back to me. And just because you won't or can't undestand something, that doesn't make the other person a liar. When you're 5th grade teacher was explaining something you didn't get, did you think they were lying?

[Spike!]

Spike you should know or am I wrong - thinking GG - what happen ??>>>

Of course its Lucky Strike, nobody massacre's the English language quite like you.

[I have cookies]

nobody massacre's the English language quite like you.

No comment - i just smile ...

Cheers

[Spike!]

In gambling, you paddle your own canoe.>>>

The reason nobody ever gives gambling secrets away for free is its so much damned work getting them. It takes so long, and involves so much effort, that you naturally hang on to them for yourself. Only an idiot runs into the street blabbing to everybody he meets, after years of work. But idiots never discover anything worthwhile anyway, so I guess it doesn't matter.

[bombus]

Those who reject what Spike freely shares...

I'm sorry, did I miss something? 

[Steve]

I have cookies=stupid lucky strike.

Correct. He has posted under same IP as his previous username. I'm not sure why you're back LS. Didnt you request to be removed or something?

Anyway I havent read all the stuff here, some over the line and some on it. If spike is here to contribute, and doesn't break any rules, he's welcome here unless of course there is an overwhelming majority of members that dont want him here. No I dont agree with much of what what spike says - I dont agree with a lot of people but that isnt reason to stifle what he says. If people want to attack him or anyone on a personal level, they are not welcome here. I removed some of the posts. If you want to have these kind of discussions, please do it elsewhere as the posts will just be removed.

[Steve]

-